Re: [ck] Re: SD still better than CFS for 3d ?(was Re: 2.6.23-rc1)

[Ingo Molnar]

* david@xxxxxxx <david@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Would you be interested in trying CFS and doing some numers perhaps? 
> > It requires some work: you have to start up your favorite game in a 
> > way that gives a reliable framerate number. (many games allow the 
> > display of FPS in-game) In Quake3 i simply started the game and did 
> > not move the player - that is something easy to reproduce.
> 
> the one report that I saw said that the FPS numbers were overall the 
> same, but what the reporter was seeing was that CFS was doing it in 
> bursts of activity while SD was smoother. [...]

which report is that, precisely? I'm not aware of any such report past 
CFS v14 or so.

> IIRC Linus responded with thoughts on granularity and the fact that 
> changing from Hz 1000 to Hz 100 will increase the timeslices in CFS by 
> 10x (which could be enough to trigger this sort of issue)

ah, you mean Kasper Sandberg's report? That turned out to be based on an 
older CFS version, not v2.6.23-rc1. Kasper said he'll redo his tests, 
and if there's still any regression left we'll fix it.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/